If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Shailesh Humbad wrote:
For most people, desktop hard drives are hardly ever accessed anyway, so speed is pretty irrelevant. Unless you're setting up a server that will be accessed by many, go for the cheapest drive per byte stored. Nonsense, everything the system is running is loaded from HDD, and the speed is directly effected by speed of that hard drive. A Celeron 800 with a WD Raptor HDD will feel faster for everday use than a P4 3.2GHz with a budget-grade 40GB HDD. Nothing wrong with choosing cheapest GB/$ for mass storage, but it cripples a system to use such drives as primary app or OS drive. I second that. Think about how much disk access Windows XP does just to log you off the computer and save settings. Some people's profiles are many megabytes, and Windows is just slow, so having a fast HDD makes things much smoother. I don't think I could live without my 2x Raid-0 10K Raptors. I would get a laptop, but I can't stand their measly 4200rpm drives (on some). Maybe next I'll get a pair of 15k scsi drives... How many times a day do you log on and off, and how many seconds does that represent? -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
CJT wrote:
kony wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:29:03 GMT, CJT wrote: Alright, I'll concede there, but a 7200 will still provide a very noticable performance increase over a 5400. Not just in drive benchmarks, but in day to day computer usage. I think the devil will be in the details. If you mostly just browse the Web, I doubt your disk will be exercised much. If you do a lot of video editing, you probably want something pretty fast -- most likely RAID. There's a whole range in between (and perhaps beyond). Clueless. Browser caches everything to disk, and reloads it all from this cache until pages are refreshed unless brower is changed from defaults. The only time HDD speed doesn't matter much is when system has A) Excess system memory to cache files B) Limited multitasking so files are never flushed from this cache. I stand by what I said. Watch your disk light some time. If it's on a lot, then the disk speed might make a difference. If it hardly ever flashes, then your drive's speed doesn't matter one bit. Most folk's applications have a heck of a time getting from the hard drive to RAM without flashing the LED. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
the difference between a 5400 and a 7200 is noticable even on a desktop
"CJT" wrote in message ... Darren Harris wrote: Can anyone tell me if hard drive spindle speed is an important factor to consider when purchasing a hard drive? Or should I just concentrate on average latency, average access, and max. full seek time? I ask because two hard drives with a data rate of 80mps can differ in these other respects. Thanks a lot. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. For most people, desktop hard drives are hardly ever accessed anyway, so speed is pretty irrelevant. Unless you're setting up a server that will be accessed by many, go for the cheapest drive per byte stored. -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
David Maynard wrote:
CJT wrote: kony wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:29:03 GMT, CJT wrote: Alright, I'll concede there, but a 7200 will still provide a very noticable performance increase over a 5400. Not just in drive benchmarks, but in day to day computer usage. I think the devil will be in the details. If you mostly just browse the Web, I doubt your disk will be exercised much. If you do a lot of video editing, you probably want something pretty fast -- most likely RAID. There's a whole range in between (and perhaps beyond). Clueless. Browser caches everything to disk, and reloads it all from this cache until pages are refreshed unless brower is changed from defaults. The only time HDD speed doesn't matter much is when system has A) Excess system memory to cache files B) Limited multitasking so files are never flushed from this cache. I stand by what I said. Watch your disk light some time. If it's on a lot, then the disk speed might make a difference. If it hardly ever flashes, then your drive's speed doesn't matter one bit. Most folk's applications have a heck of a time getting from the hard drive to RAM without flashing the LED. No disagreement here, but for most folks that's a minuscule fraction of the time they spend sitting in front of the computer. -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Monster wrote:
the difference between a 5400 and a 7200 is noticable even on a desktop Yeah -- they tend to generate more heat. "CJT" wrote in message ... Darren Harris wrote: Can anyone tell me if hard drive spindle speed is an important factor to consider when purchasing a hard drive? Or should I just concentrate on average latency, average access, and max. full seek time? I ask because two hard drives with a data rate of 80mps can differ in these other respects. Thanks a lot. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. For most people, desktop hard drives are hardly ever accessed anyway, so speed is pretty irrelevant. Unless you're setting up a server that will be accessed by many, go for the cheapest drive per byte stored. -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
CJT wrote:
David Maynard wrote: CJT wrote: kony wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:29:03 GMT, CJT wrote: Alright, I'll concede there, but a 7200 will still provide a very noticable performance increase over a 5400. Not just in drive benchmarks, but in day to day computer usage. I think the devil will be in the details. If you mostly just browse the Web, I doubt your disk will be exercised much. If you do a lot of video editing, you probably want something pretty fast -- most likely RAID. There's a whole range in between (and perhaps beyond). Clueless. Browser caches everything to disk, and reloads it all from this cache until pages are refreshed unless brower is changed from defaults. The only time HDD speed doesn't matter much is when system has A) Excess system memory to cache files B) Limited multitasking so files are never flushed from this cache. I stand by what I said. Watch your disk light some time. If it's on a lot, then the disk speed might make a difference. If it hardly ever flashes, then your drive's speed doesn't matter one bit. Most folk's applications have a heck of a time getting from the hard drive to RAM without flashing the LED. No disagreement here, but for most folks that's a minuscule fraction of the time they spend sitting in front of the computer. Well, we could quibble over what 'minuscule' means in this context but the reality of it is that most home users don't load up Word and then leave it there all day while they, however frequently or infrequently, pound out documents; they, e.g. families, are often a competing set of users with applications going up and down rather often and even a 'single' gamer doesn't necessarily load up just one game for the day. And it really doesn't matter if 'mathematically' the disk usage is a 'small percentage' of the total time because what a user 'feels' and gauges things by is how long it takes between 'click-click' and whatever they expect to happen from it. And that's before we even get to doing a couple of things simultaneously and/or burning CD/DVDs, playing videos/MP3s, etc. I have yet to see a user who didn't notice the difference between a 15 gig 5400 RPM drive and a 120 gig 7200 RPM drive. The later is simply faster. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Makes little difference unless
Your a benchmark watcher your transferring huge files between partitions..and maybe drives on a regular basis, but there are other factors that effect data speed between 2 physical drives other than HD RPM speed Your using something other than OB IDE...SCSI drives (and sata, I think- just started looking at moving to this format and can't give you an opinion yet) would benefit or if your running a separate IDE controller If your running a file server....even this is not necessary.....lots of memory can make up easily for HD rpm. I would look for reliability, warranty length, and if you want, the buffer size ( I don't see/feel that its any faster 4 or 8)along with a good sale price all my opinion, works for me sale gimmicks are every where "Darren Harris" wrote in message om... Can anyone tell me if hard drive spindle speed is an important factor to consider when purchasing a hard drive? Or should I just concentrate on average latency, average access, and max. full seek time? I ask because two hard drives with a data rate of 80mps can differ in these other respects. Thanks a lot. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
CJT wrote:
snip Alright, I'll concede there, but a 7200 will still provide a very noticable performance increase over a 5400. Not just in drive benchmarks, but in day to day computer usage. I think the devil will be in the details. If you mostly just browse the Web, I doubt your disk will be exercised much. No, but the devil will be exorcised. Odie |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 04:48:06 GMT, CJT
wrote: You must be on crack. It is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH MUCH slower that anyone with semi-modern gear is accustomed to. Even GbE on a PC is slower than budget local storage HDD. Server-side apps are a logistic solution, performance be damned. You're just pulling things out of your *ss. I'm telling you about actual experience. Oops, I guess I forgot that I've never used a computer before, LOL. Of course, if you just have one (truly "personal") computer, it'll have a disk attached. But I think for many people, disk drive speed is pretty low on the list of things on which they should be spending money. That's why some people buy newer computer then soon feel it isn't much faster, because they didn't significantly improve the bottleneck to their use, which is often the HDD. Not in my experience for typical office tasks in a properly configured system. There is no such thing as "properly configured" that will change the fact that data I/O is significantly slower over a LAN, compared to any modern HDD. No grand theory changes that, all you have is additional overhead in the already-slowest part of a system, at least for these light tasks. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 04:45:55 GMT, CJT
wrote: Nonsense, everything the system is running is loaded from HDD, and the speed is directly effected by speed of that hard drive. A Celeron 800 with a WD Raptor HDD will feel faster for everday use than a P4 3.2GHz with a budget-grade 40GB HDD. Nothing wrong with choosing cheapest GB/$ for mass storage, but it cripples a system to use such drives as primary app or OS drive. I disagree. If you spend all day browsing and word processing, you load your browser and word processor once in the morning, and once they're open then opening them isn't any longer an issue (unless your machine crashes a lot -- but that's not usually the disk's fault). I suppose you're just a troll, since I already told you that the browser caches all those files to the HDD when "browsing". No matter how much you disagree, time and time again people everywhere notice the difference between an old/slow HDD and something modern/fast, not to mention benchmarks. A lot of memory will reduce need for HDD access, but the two are complimentary storage, not one a replacement for the other. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ATA100 hard drive not recognized when PS/2 mouse is not attached | S. Lipson | Homebuilt PC's | 2 | July 27th 04 09:55 PM |
Large Hard Drive & BIOS upgrade problems | Lago Jardin | Homebuilt PC's | 1 | June 12th 04 02:08 PM |
Hard drive heating up | Kipper | Homebuilt PC's | 4 | May 22nd 04 10:37 PM |
Help needed: problem installing XP on new system | GJ | General | 26 | March 1st 04 10:04 PM |
Multi-boot Windows XP without special software | Timothy Daniels | General | 11 | December 12th 03 05:38 AM |